Christian grandmother killed by euthanasia in Canada against family’s will
by
A Canadian doctor killed a cognitively impaired great-grandmother who couldn’t answer basic questions, even though she previously refused euthanasia due to her Christian beliefs.
(LifeSiteNews) — A 83-year-old Christian grandmother with cognitive problems was euthanized despite her stated opposition and against her family’s will through Canada’s euthanasia program in July.
According to her family’s horrifying account, great-grandmother Brigitte Stegemann had lived in an Ontario long-term care facility for the final two years of her life. She originally explicitly stated that, due to her Christian beliefs, she didn’t want to be euthanized. About five months before her death, she had been diagnosed with untreatable Stage IV stomach cancer.
While her granddaughter — named Brigette in her grandmother’s honor — who held legal power of attorney was away on vacation, the medical team convinced Stegemann to request euthanasia or “Medical Assistance in Dying” (MAID).
“The facility initiated the renewed MAiD discussions with a patient who had declined,” noted Kelsi Sheren in her Substack report, “The Last Ten Days of Brigette ‘GG’ Stegemann.”
Sheren listed the ways that staff at the facility quietly worked toward planning Stegemann’s demise without her family’s knowledge.
“The facility’s staff conducted the private meetings while the advocate was away. The facility’s manager completed the application. The facility’s personnel witnessed the signature,” wrote Sheren.
“At every load bearing point where the law imagines independence, the same institution appears initiator, facilitator, scribe, and witness while the one genuinely independent party, a Power of Attorney of twelve years, was kept, in the family’s phrase, in the dark despite their constant physical presence at the home.”
Writing at the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition’s blog, the family recounted a troubling July 6 meeting with staff:
Our family attended the scheduled MAID meeting expecting to discuss the process with GG’s physician.
Before the physician arrived, an administrator and a registered nurse from the facility entered the room and advised us that the doctor was running behind schedule.
During this conversation, which took place entirely inside GG’s room in her immediate presence, Brigitte asked who had arranged the MAID meeting. No clear answer was ever given. Instead, the family was met with an immediate wall of defensiveness, specifically from the registered nurse. The nurse informed the family that staff had met privately with GG on two occasions during Brigitte’s 10-day vacation to discuss MAID.
Brigitte asked why those discussions had been initiated when GG had previously declined MAID due to her Christian beliefs. She asked point-blank whether these conversations were initiated by GG herself or by the facility staff.
The registered nurse became physically agitated and defensive, wagging her head back and forth as she spoke directly to Brigitte, stating, “I’m advocating for her.”
When Brigitte pushed further to find out exactly who brought up the conversation about MAID, the nurse snapped, “I don’t need to tell you anything.”
Brigitte countered that she had served as GG’s advocate for over a decade, held Power of Attorney, and visited consistently, noting that she had never once encountered this particular nurse during her frequent visits. As the interaction grew increasingly hostile, Brigitte finally stated, “I don’t understand where this attitude is coming from.”
The nurse snapped back, “Well, you have attitude.” At that point, Brigitte told the nurse she needed to leave the room and return only when she was composed. The nurse scoffed and stormed out.
“As family members preparing to discuss the impending death of our grandmother, we found this volatile, unprofessional behaviour from a staff member completely unacceptable, particularly because this aggressive argument was brought directly into GG’s room where she could see and hear the distress it was causing,” wrote the family.
GG’s family described the July 7 meeting with her doctor, referred to as “Dr. K”, as a “deeply alarming farce.” The purpose of the meeting was for Dr. K to determine whether the elderly grandmother possessed the capacity to make an informed decision regarding MAID. Brigitte repeatedly proved unable to answer simple questions about her family.